A graph that should be front-page news • Hacker News Board

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#41

Post by yorwba » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:33 AM UTC

gpderetta wrote: post #26

retube wrote: post #24

You also need to ask what is the likelihood you get this move just by chance

According to https://climatecasino.substack.com/p/some-monsters-are-real , this is a 1 in 7000 years event (i.e. 3.5 sigmas).

Assuming the measurements are independent samples from a normal distribution. Which they of course aren't, as measurements of adjacent days are obviously correlated (if they were independent, a 1-in-7000 event could be expected to happen on about 2 days within a 44-year span). Now the question is what the nature of the deviation is.

- How independent are measurements of different years?

- Has there been a systematic change in the distribution mean?

- Has there been a systematic change in the distribution variance?

- Was there a good reason to assume that the temperature distribution would be normally distributed to begin with? (Maybe there are strong non-additive effects.)

In any case, it's clear that assuming the observed temperatures in the 1991-2020 range follow a normal distribution and temperatures outside that date range will follow the same distribution is a bad model of reality.

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#42

Post by sph » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:34 AM UTC

KingOfCoders wrote: post #17

There are many thing people could do, eat less meat, smaller homes, electric cars, green energy, no flights etc. but the vast majority of people does exactly nothing.

Yes, I should recycle more. Meanwhile, it’s OK for politicians to invest in coal and build gas-powered datacenters, while the ultrabillionaires buy groceries in a private jet.

Don’t worry about that, just recycle more!

It is about time we stop blaming the individual at the bottom of the ladder for the problems of society. And let me preempt you: society isn’t made up of individuals, but it is much greater than the sum of its parts.

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#43

Post by iDon » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:35 AM UTC

Representing that as a "climate spiral" would make it unnecessary to adjust for the seasons, and the original data could be used instead of a statistical view. It makes it easy for anyone to see the trend. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_spiral - https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/visualizing-daily-global-t... - https://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/spirals/

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#44

Post by nixonaddiction » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:36 AM UTC

“wahhhh this is bad” ok sure but how. what will the downstream effects be. how can we model increased ocean temperatures and how they will affect weather patterns or whatever? gives me no info on the implications, let alone info on the implications with rigor.

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#45

Post by Snafuh » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:41 AM UTC

kalx wrote: post #29

KingOfCoders wrote: post #17

There are many thing people could do, eat less meat, smaller homes, electric cars, green energy, no flights etc. but the vast majority of people does exactly nothing.

That’s because those who (our countries that enforce it) eat less, have smaller properties, less productive cars and infrastructure etc, those are the countries that will have the short end of the stick in 10-20 years time - just look at Europe. The tragedy of the commons at a global scale.

> less productive cars

How does enforcing emissions regulations result in less productive cars?

Cars move about 1.5 people per trip on average. A big pickup or SUV is not any more productive doing this task than a mid sized car.

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#46

Post by qsera » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:51 AM UTC

sph wrote: post #39

noosphr wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how you can make that claim with only 29 years of data without making some pretty big assumptions about the underlying distribution.

We have ways to determine the past climate without having access to direct measurements.

But there is no way to confirm that those methods are accurate...

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#47

Post by tramc » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:52 AM UTC

nixonaddiction wrote: post #44

“wahhhh this is bad” ok sure but how. what will the downstream effects be. how can we model increased ocean temperatures and how they will affect weather patterns or whatever? gives me no info on the implications, let alone info on the implications with rigor.

It’s not spelled in nursery rhyme, but it literally does give info on the implications. As the article states, they are not as simple as A => B, so it provides general idea of the implications. The general idea being ecosystem destabilisation and intensification of extremes and their frequency.

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#48

Post by HPsquared » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:55 AM UTC

iDon wrote: post #43

Representing that as a "climate spiral" would make it unnecessary to adjust for the seasons, and the original data could be used instead of a statistical view. It makes it easy for anyone to see the trend. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_spiral - https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/visualizing-daily-global-t... - https://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/spirals/

Polar coordinates are such a nice way to visualise periodic data.

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#49

Post by dudefeliciano » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:55 AM UTC

nixonaddiction wrote: post #44

“wahhhh this is bad” ok sure but how. what will the downstream effects be. how can we model increased ocean temperatures and how they will affect weather patterns or whatever? gives me no info on the implications, let alone info on the implications with rigor.

> How they will affect weather patterns or whatever?

> This is why graphs like this matter. Not because they prove that catastrophe is inevitable, and not because they predict the precise sequence of events over coming years. Science rarely deals in absolutes. What they show is that Earth is moving beyond the range within which modern human civilisation developed. We’re entering climatic conditions that our infrastructure, ecosystems, economies and institutions were never designed to accommodate.

Reading helps. Also it's pretty clear from the "waaaaah" that you are not asking a good faith question but rather dismissing the article, without bringing any information or sources to back whatever point you are trying to make - ironic.

Re: A graph that should be front-page news

#50

Post by zipy124 » Mon, Jul 13, 2026, 10:59 AM UTC

voidUpdate wrote: post #14

If it should be front-page news, shouldn't it also be at the top of the article, rather than right at the bottom?

That was my first reaction too. A perfect fit for a cover image of a story. Also generally when referencing something within an article you want to display a figure before talking about it.